XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis
From: bree@bree.com
On 8 Oct 2005 09:20:27 GMT, Siwel Naph wrote:
>Steve Hayes wrote:
>
>>>> Aren't we being a bit guilty of judging the past from our current
>>>> state of knowledge? If witches really were what they were concieved
>>>> to be when they were burned, what was occuring was not persecution
>>>> but protection of society and especially of innocents.
>>>
>>>It wasn't just witches I was referring to. Christianity took some of
>>>its older harshness from paganism, but it still obviously chose what
>>>it took.
>>
>> But if they are all sincere mere Christians, there won't be any
>> witches, not even Jadis.
I wish people wouldn't use 'mere Christians' (with or without the capital
M) as tho they were different from 'Christians'. Lewis was writing about
the beliefs of Christians. The only groups that it would make sense to
exclude would be those who didn't accept the main doctrines (ie groups such
as the Mormons, perhaps Quakers, Swedenborgians, etc).
>So all those executed as witches were in fact genuine witches, rather
>than mistakenly (and sincerely) accused Christians? And witches, mistaken
>or genuine, were the only ones subject to cruel and unusual punishment?
'Cruel and unusual' is by definition relative to culture. I don't know
that Europeans used worse methods than Orientals of the same period. Search
for 'exquisite Chinese torture'?
A difference might be the reasons for the torture. Orientals used it for
punishment/deterrent/revenge and for getting information for practical
purposes: espionage, intrigue, investigation of ordinary crimes. I've
heard (I do hope even they were not as bad as that) that there was
something in the Middle Ages in Europe about a suspected witch being forced
to confess for the good of her soul? Did either E's or O's use it to
investigate a thought or speech crime such as religious heresy?
Bree
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
